Welcome to the Piano World Piano ForumsOver 2 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

I have a Yamaha P-85, and i love it too . Excellent for beginners on a very low budget . As you know, you can combine 2 voices (by pressing the 2 buttons at the same time). You should try pressing the GP1 and GP2 buttons. It sounds strange, but in a cool way xD (i love how it sounds, but you could totally hate it).

Also, the "strings" voice is excellent for accompaniment on any other voice (i love the harpsichord).

In this model, there is a feature to adjust the balance between the two voicings in dual mode, but when I press the button, i dont detect any changes as the strings seems to overpower the GP and I would like the strings to be a bit softer.

Do the keys feel like a real acoustic piano? I'm looking for keys with really heavy touch. The only ones I found was the Roland V Piano and DP90S.

There have been a number of pianos mentioned in this thread, so I'm not sure which you're asking about, but the P105 is supposed to have the same action as the P95, so it would be a relatively light touch.

Though also, I think the V PIano has a relatively light touch (though it feels nothing like the P95). I don't know what a DP90S is. But if you prefer a heavier touch, I'd suggest trying a Kawai, or some of the other Yamahas (P155/CP33/CP300/CP50 would be possibilities, which all use the same action), maybe a Korg like the SV1, all depending also on what else you're looking for.

Do the keys feel like a real acoustic piano? I'm looking for keys with really heavy touch. The only ones I found was the Roland V Piano and DP90S.

Originally Posted By: anotherscott

There have been a number of pianos mentioned in this thread, so I'm not sure which you're asking about, but the P105 is supposed to have the same action as the P95, so it would be a relatively light touch.

It does and it is. There are several things I really like about the new P105 but I cannot sense any change in the action you are familiar with.

It's certainly heavy enough to simulate piano but on the light side of average. The PX-130 was about average and the new PX-150 is on the firm side of average.

I'm going to have to press Roland for some clarification of the "Deluxe PHA III w/escapement" vs "PHA III Ivory Feel-S w/escapement" as I now notice more of these distinctions in the literature. I really thought it was related to the different keytops they had made but now I'm less sure. The Roland DP-90 is the next gen iteration of the DP-990F. The DP-90S is the high polish version of the same. But in the lit, they mention the two variations of the PHA III w/escapement. Looking at our LX-15, RG-1F & FP-7F, the LX-15 and RG-1F have a 2-part, 2-tone sharp (the plastic on the side of the key is more the color of wood) but on the FP-7F the visible part looks like one piece. However, the tops of the keys looks the same on the FP-7F and LX-15 but has a different texture pattern on the RG-1F.

I went back to SA do decompress after 3 15 hour work days in a row and concur the P105 is a wonderful instrument. Even though it has the same GHS action as the 95 it is different, it seems to be a bit "bouncier" closer to the 130 than the 95. I find this a very good thing.

The main Rhodes sound is a HUGE improvement- its nice they added a Wurli as well but to me the main attraction are the speakers, sound and touch.

I would argue the 105 wins vs. the 150. But 105 vs the 350 i would give a slight edge to the 350 but both sound great.

key to sound wins in my opinion on the 350, I find better dynamic control.

I found i would play the 150 for a minute, go the 350 and be lured back to the 105

i had the chance to play a 105 the other day at GC for a few minutes. They didn't have the PX -50's in yet. but still did have the 130 and 330 on display (with not a hint of the new generation in the salesman's mind... where does GC find these guys?...). vs the PX-330, i thought the P-105 was much more fun to play. i liked its light action and the piano sound was great. it wasn't the greatest demo environment- no pedal hooked up and i had to play it standing up with the board nearly over my head but i was greatly impressed with the piano sound and the onboard speakers.

I didn't care at all for the PX- 330 in comparison- i thought it was sluggish and the action too heavy. But i believe the PX-50 series will have a new action, so i will reserve judgment until then.

i had the chance to play a 105 the other day at GC for a few minutes. They didn't have the PX -50's in yet. but still did have the 130 and 330 on display (with not a hint of the new generation in the salesman's mind... where does GC find these guys?...). vs the PX-330, i thought the P-105 was much more fun to play. i liked its light action and the piano sound was great. it wasn't the greatest demo environment- no pedal hooked up and i had to play it standing up with the board nearly over my head but i was greatly impressed with the piano sound and the onboard speakers.

I didn't care at all for the PX- 330 in comparison- i thought it was sluggish and the action too heavy. But i believe the PX-50 series will have a new action, so i will reserve judgment until then.

But for $599- i thought the P-105 was a peach!

Ironically the "L" shaped shopping center in South Jersey has both Sam Ash and Guitar Center within literally 300-400 feet of each other!! GC did not have any of the new boards whatsoever (no x50, 105 of Krome). When I called them they wanted to be sure that I didn't mean the 155. It was either that or being put on hold.

I would argue the 105 wins vs. the 150. But 105 vs the 350 i would give a slight edge to the 350 but both sound great.

So this is a "350 tweeters tip the balance" argument? Or are you talking about the other voices in the 105/350 as well? From a sound technology standpoint (not everything of course) the P-105 is rather typical low end Yamaha: stretched 3:1, short attacks, very short bland loops, quavering chords, faint sympathetic resonance, short decay times - i.e. nothing to write home about. Could it be the new CF sample? Perhaps it's one of those "the sum is more than the parts" organic things, but I'd like to better understand where you're coming from. Could you clarify?

I would argue the 105 wins vs. the 150. But 105 vs the 350 i would give a slight edge to the 350 but both sound great.

So this is a "350 tweeters tip the balance" argument? Or are you talking about the other voices in the 105/350 as well? From a sound technology standpoint (not everything of course) the P-105 is rather typical low end Yamaha: stretched 3:1, short attacks, very short bland loops, quavering chords, faint sympathetic resonance, short decay times - i.e. nothing to write home about. Could it be the new CF sample? Perhaps it's one of those "the sum is more than the parts" organic things, but I'd like to better understand where you're coming from. Could you clarify?

#1 for me is the sound coming out of the piano speakers itself and how it conveys the sample and changes in dynamics- the combination of the improved amplification and clarity make the 105 a more playable instrument for me personally (just my opinion). If I am going to need to connect a 150 to monitors then forget it. #2- the CF sample is an improvement as well. I was in the store playing Vienna by Billy Joel, and some people stopped to listen the quality of the sound coming out of the Yamaha- it passed the large display room test.

I would then totally agree with your statement that the tweeters on the 350 tip the argument. I found when I was picking the same sound i.e. the Classical one on the 350 I heard the entire range of the sound where as on the 150 it felt as though the EQ was almost brittle and higher above the mid range and turned down below. It was borderline the same experience as the #2 piano sound on the SP170 series.

Imagine the 150 had on it an equalizer and the mid to lower mid range was turned down. To me thats what I heard. and the mid high was too much.

Another dealbreaker for me is having the dolce sample and the rock piano sample. Casio did a FANTASTIC JOB on these 2 sounds and to me they make the 350 worth the extra $200.In terms of the action, I prefer Casio's, but the output of the instrument is just as important. I have no problem with GHS, (it seems the one action I depise is the NH by Korg)

*I also called MF yesterday and person I spoke to said they would honor over the phone the 15% coupon which would make the 105 510- just now working on getting 250 for the 95

I would then totally agree with your statement that the tweeters on the 350 tip the argument. I found when I was picking the same sound i.e. the Classical one on the 350 I heard the entire range of the sound where as on the 150 it felt as though the EQ was almost brittle and higher above the mid range and turned down below. It was borderline the same experience as the #2 piano sound on the SP170 series.

Imagine the 150 had on it an equalizer and the mid to lower mid range was turned down. To me thats what I heard. and the mid high was too much.

I would think just the opposite would happen without tweeters in the 150 - the bass & mid would be there but the treble not so much. Unless you're hearing cone breakup or some kind of different EQ between models. Weird.

Originally Posted By: Possum P95

Another dealbreaker for me is having the dolce sample and the rock piano sample. Casio did a FANTASTIC JOB on these 2 sounds and to me they make the 350 worth the extra $200.

I believe Mike Martin said the base piano sample is the same for all presets, and that you can get maybe get close to the dolce with the settings?

Originally Posted By: Possum P95

In terms of the action, I prefer Casio's...

Interesting.

Originally Posted By: Possum P95

*I also called MF yesterday and person I spoke to said they would honor over the phone the 15% coupon which would make the 105 510- just now working on getting 250 for the 95

I wonder why they are so restrictive via the web? Maybe it's one of those "can't advertise below a certain level" things they all seem to adhere to. When is a market not a market.

There is voice selection, brilliance, and touch response. Between those maybe you can get near the dolce?

Voice selection lets you choose among 5 piano sounds (concert, modern, classic, mellow, bright). The PX350 has the same 5 piano sounds plus dolce and others. So this is not any kind of sound editing, you're just calling up a different patch. (The 350 has more preset patches in it, but you still can't edit any of them.)

Touch response is a velocity curve setting, it does not change the underlying sounds, it is only altering how much finger force you need to use to trigger them at a particular level. While that can might appear to make the tone "gentler" for example (by requiring you to use more finger force to generate the higher velocities), it's not really altering the sound, and specifically, if someone likes the way dolce sounds when playing a MIDI file, touch response is not an issue, as a MIDI file will sound the same no matter what the touch response is set at.

So the only way you can alter the tone of the sound at all is with the general brilliance setting (and reverb and chorus).

The PX-150 has the identical piano sample. The mellow piano preset on the PX-150 is very similar to the dolce preset on the PX-350. You may also want to experiment when different touch settings to get this soft delicate sound.

I don't doubt Mike, so sure, "mellow" is probably as close as the 150 comes to the 350's "dolce" -- but the 350 also has mellow, which I assume is identical to mellow on the 150, so dolce, while presumably close, is still different enough to have warranted its own preset.

And yes, as I pretty much said, altering the touch so that that you have to hit harder to get higher velocity samples will make it easier to get a gentle sound out of it, but that's not the same, it won't affect the playback of MIDI generated data. Though if Dolce was derived largely by a change in velocity mapping (as opposed to EQ or other processing), I could see where playing a less gentle sound on a velocity setting that made it harder to get high velocity sounds out of it would result in, well, a more gentle sound!

Casio PX 850 has 2 pairs of loud speakers with total power of 24 watts, while Yamaha as only half of number of loudspeakers and half of the voice power.What if I use the total of only 8 watts for Yamaha or Casio? Does Yamaha sound better?Does Casio sound better when I use the total of 12 watts on either Yamaha or Casio?

More watts doesn't make something sound better... all else being equal, it allows it to go louder, or to be clean at louder levels. So the way to use "less" power than is built into a piano is to turn the volume knob down. Though even then, the extra power available may allow peaks to play more cleanly.

But also, all else is never equal. So in fact, 12 watts into a very efficient speaker system can be louder than 24 into an inefficient one. So as usual, the only way to even be sure which is louder is to hear it in person. (Unless maybe the spec sheet includes SPL ratings, which are far more useful than wattage specs, when you're dealing with systems where the amp can't be decoupled from the speakers.

At any rate, it sounds like what you really want to do is compare the sound of two pianos apart from their variables in amps and speakers. You can do that very easily... just audition them with good headphones. That bypasses the amp and speaker variable completely.

Hello everybody. I bought this weekend the new digital piano Yamaha P-105 In store only had one for sale. I'm very happy with it.I was undecided between P-105 and Px-150, but where I live I could only try the P-105. I think the Yamaha is well represented in Portugal unlike Casio. Casio not bet on the Portuguese market...This forum really helped me make my decision. Thanks!

Well done Carlos. Seems a big improvement on the former P95 in terms of piano sound. There're also good options for computer interfacing.

You're right - about Casio in Portugal. My first option when I was buying was for a Casio, but I couldn't find the models to demo. My second option for experimenting was Kawai, but they are almost impossible to find in Portugal, so I didn't take the risk.

Roland and Yamaha are quite well represented though, which is OK because, on the whole, I like their stuff a lot.